Star Trek (the 2009 film)
Discussion
I think William Shatner was supposed to be in it but didn't 'creative' issues get in the way? Anyhow I really enjoyed it, a great reboot of the Star Trek franchise. I wonder if they'll include any of TNG cast in subsequent films, as they did with Spock in the first? The fact that he's a retard Labour supporter aside, I'd love to see Patrick Stewart back in the Captain's chair sometime, or Brent Spiner as Data.
Shatner is rumoured to be slated to appear in the 'second' Star Trek film iirc possibly as Kirk's grandfather (his name is James too). The original script for the reboot had Shatner's Kirk appearing as a hologram wishing Spock a happy birthday. It was to be used by Spock 'prime' to give the young Kirk the revelation that they were to become best friends. JJ Abrams scrapped that idea in favour of letting them find out for themselves over the course of the film and Shatner deemed that short amount of screen time not worthy of his time.
Interestingly, Nimoy did pretty much the same thing when he was presented with the 'Generations' script. His screen time was only a few lines at Kirks rememberence service after he got 'killed' on the Eneterprise B. He said no, and the scene never got shot.
Nerd alert over...
Interestingly, Nimoy did pretty much the same thing when he was presented with the 'Generations' script. His screen time was only a few lines at Kirks rememberence service after he got 'killed' on the Eneterprise B. He said no, and the scene never got shot.
Nerd alert over...
Why in the film are the Romulans so unRomulanlike? It took me until about 3/4 of the way through to realise they were Romulansd and not just random enemies. GBreat film nevertheless though, uncanny how they all seem to be exactly how you'd envisage younger versions of themselves to be.
Antony Moxey said:
Why in the film are the Romulans so unRomulanlike?
Because a large amount of time has passed between when we (the viewing public) last saw them and when the film starts. Look at it this way, why do people in England look completely different now to how they looked in the 1890s?Personally I thought it was poor, as I said on the good films you've watched recently thread. Chekov in particular was bloody annoying, and the cliches were painful. There was never any tension and the end never in doubt. It just needed Kirk saying "I've always known I would die alone".
Edited by grumbledoak on Saturday 3rd July 23:18
grumbledoak said:
; There was never any tension and the end never in doubt. It just needed Kirk saying "I've always known I would die alone".
Screenplay was by the same blokes who did the screenplay for Transformers so it was never going to be clever. Not as bad as many feared but it had to appeal to a broader audience than the established 'Trekkers/Trekkies'.Saw this again last night, great film considering it could have been a disaster.
Only charachters I found badly cast were
Uhura - I seem to remember her been curvy with a soothing voice rather than a yappy "boy bodied" skinny thing?
Chekov - I don't think they could have cast a more "un-chekov" character, might as well have used Will Smith. And the scripy must have made the actor cringe surely?
Scotty - Great way to make a likeable character detested, I don't remember him having such an annoying personality?
Besides that though, Bones and Spock were spot on, Kirk was a good choice, Sulu was passable (although I cannot stop thinking of him saying "Chick's a MILF!"
) and I think Abrahms has given the Star Trek universe a bit of film-modernisation which it was badly in need of 
Fingers crossed that the next film is just as good!
Only charachters I found badly cast were
Uhura - I seem to remember her been curvy with a soothing voice rather than a yappy "boy bodied" skinny thing?
Chekov - I don't think they could have cast a more "un-chekov" character, might as well have used Will Smith. And the scripy must have made the actor cringe surely?
Scotty - Great way to make a likeable character detested, I don't remember him having such an annoying personality?
Besides that though, Bones and Spock were spot on, Kirk was a good choice, Sulu was passable (although I cannot stop thinking of him saying "Chick's a MILF!"
) and I think Abrahms has given the Star Trek universe a bit of film-modernisation which it was badly in need of Fingers crossed that the next film is just as good!
It also has one of the best precredit sequences in any film I've seen. The use of music over the images of battle only for the carnage to be broken by the cries of a baby 
. The conversation between mother and father that followed was actually quite moving too.
Great bit of film making that
. The conversation between mother and father that followed was actually quite moving too.Great bit of film making that
I thought it was far too incoherent. There really was no reason for the movie, and the whole thing existed to justify itself. I like Star Trek, but am by no means a trekkie. I really didn't care for this movie at all.
- Why would they be building a star ship on the ground in Iowa rather than in space?
- Why are all the cadets out yukking it up in the middle of nowhere Iowa when the Academy is in San Francisco??
- Where the hell did the Romulans go for the intervening 25 years?
- How did they know when to come back to intercept Spock?
- What the hell is Red Matter?????
- Why would they be building a star ship on the ground in Iowa rather than in space?
- Why are all the cadets out yukking it up in the middle of nowhere Iowa when the Academy is in San Francisco??
- Where the hell did the Romulans go for the intervening 25 years?
- How did they know when to come back to intercept Spock?
- What the hell is Red Matter?????
- Why would they be building a star ship on the ground in Iowa rather than in space?
Why not - do you know how expensive it is to fly Poles and Indians into orbit? They really don't get the whole zero gravity thing - something to do with potatoes and masala.
- Why are all the cadets out yukking it up in the middle of nowhere Iowa when the Academy is in San Francisco??
So you can 'beam me down Scotty' in space but not on Earth? Cheap real estate. Tell me how many military barracks are in major cities? I served in a few in London but only when doing ceremonial b
ks.- Where the hell did the Romulans go for the intervening 25 years?
Watch Eric Bana's scars and ear. There is also a very quick scene that sort of explains this.
- How did they know when to come back to intercept Spock?
They didn't, they simply waited at the black hole's portal.
- What the hell is Red Matter?????
f
king red st man - you don't know?
paddyhasneeds said:
Just caught this on Sky, not entirely convinced by the plot but thought they did a very good job of picking actors who made you think they were the original characters - Kirk in particular, very much like William Shatner.
I thought the casting was great, it was let down by the voice of Spock (why go to trouble of matching his face so well but not his voice?) and Scotty, who seemed to be chosen because Pegg is flavour of the month, he was the one main character that hadn't any resemblance whatsoever to the old one.Dare2Fail said:
Antony Moxey said:
Why in the film are the Romulans so unRomulanlike?
Because a large amount of time has passed between when we (the viewing public) last saw them and when the film starts. Look at it this way, why do people in England look completely different now to how they looked in the 1890s?Edited by Halb on Monday 5th July 09:08
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff